[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120712170242.GB31396@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 10:02:42 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Fengguang Wu <wfg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: rcu_dyntick and suspicious RCU usage
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:57:38AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 09:43:08AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:49:24AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:47:00PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > > > Hi Paul,
> > > >
> > > > Fortunately this bug is bisectable and the first bad commit is:
> > > >
> > > > commit 9b2e4f1880b789be1f24f9684f7a54b90310b5c0
> > > > Author: Paul E. McKenney <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
> > > > Date: Fri Sep 30 12:10:22 2011 -0700
> > > >
> > > > rcu: Track idleness independent of idle tasks
> > >
> > > OK, there is a problem in TINY_RCU's handling of dyntick-idle: it
> > > traces while in idle. The confusion on my part was that in TREE_RCU,
> > > the nesting and dyntick-idle indication are different, while in
> > > TINY_RCU they are one and the same.
> > >
> > > Does the following patch help?
> >
> > This one failed in my testing. Please see the end for the fixed
> > version, with on small but important change.
>
> It worked, thanks!
>
> Tested-by: Fengguang Wu <wfg@...ux.intel.com>
Very good! (And please ignore my resend of the same patch.)
I will queue this.
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists